How do we fix AMD?
>>45462988
copy intel
Let nVidia buy it so nVidia can make real CPUs to fight Intel :)
You can't fix a loser company and their fans that only think about low prices and not the health of the company
Premium companies like Apple, Intel and Nvidia are thriving while AMD is going bankrupt
but apu
lol, i'd rather it dies so master race Intel can actually put effort into making CPU instead of artifiically gimping themselves for their 'competition'
Let it die
>>45462988
release Zen
AMD really can't do anything so it's better off dead
> AMD purchase ARM Holdings
>>45463054
>AMD, known to be competitive in prices in order to achieve a better gaymen experience for just everyone
>thinks people have to care themselves about a companies health
>>45463091
Hell no, as then intel prices would rise. I like recommending AMD to strangers and then reaping the benefits by buying intel stuff for personal use
They need to release products, remain profitable, pay down their long term debts, heavily invest in R&D, and finally hire a competent marketing department to increase their presence.
>>45462988
Buying a Nvidia graphics card.
Get R&D to reverse engineer intel chips more than they do already, and put all other funds into advertising so people think it's better than intel
Get into computers, get into stores.
Cut a deal with a company to feature AMD exclusively. HP or Toshiba maybe. Have a big ass "AMD Experience" stand at every best buy/big box store.
Sell to the people who want a cheap computer to run a few games and multimedia enthusiasts.
AMD needs to fix their marketing before they can fix their product, even if they do produce something revolutionary it's no good if it does not sell.
>>45463243
>implying AMD reverse engineers anything from intel
AMD doesn't have the manpower or dollars to attempt it. Now they stick to copying obscure patents and licensing IP from strange firms no one has ever heard of before.
>>45462988
Moar coars.
They need a jingle
16 core consumer CPU with ECC please.
>>45463418
>wanting less cores for your money so intel can make more money off of you
>>45462988
how dumb, well listen here dummy here's how you IAMDumb, you stop funding them dumb dumb. now you made me mad and you look stupid well guess what no one likes amd so I hope you feel dum about it.
Give them more money
Not even shilling, if you want AMD to get on Intel's level then they need more money. If AMD had Intel's money they would get Intel's engineers and be making CPUs better than Intel. Theres nothing complicated here, just needs more money
>>45463090
is there any real information about this yet?
>>45463531
Not yet, its unlikely that they'll release anything about it given that they haven't even really spoken about K12 yet. We still don't know the specifics of the Excavator core for that matter and those parts will start coming out early next year.
>there are people who are willingly asking for Intel/Nvidia monopoly
/g/ is dead
>>45463619
Moar liek /g/ finally realized nobody benefits from saturating the market with shitty and worthless AMD chips
>>45463639
Ok, so you rather pay $500 on an entry-level CPU.
>>45463653
>implying that will happen
AMD FUD machine at full effect as always
>>45463658
Of course it would. Without any real competitors, Intel has nothing to lose. Crank up the prices, don't even bother improving the chips.
This will never happen though, as Intel wants AMD to be still alive, or else he'd face monopoly charges, and they can lose shekels for that.
>>45463677
>as Intel wants AMD to be still alive
That makes no sense you retarded idiot.
>Samsung wants Apple to live
>Apple wants Qualcomm to live
>Qualcomm wants Mediatek to live
No, just no, you retard
>>45463690
Read again.
>>45463677
What about VIA? Don't they have the licence for x86?
I just sold my 280X,that thing was unstable and buggy as fuck,I'm never getting an AMD GPU ever again /g/,been using AMD since 2004.
What GPU to get,970?
What brand?
>>45463765
The one without coil whine.
>>45463765
EVGA
>>45463603
im kinda wondering if their new stuff will even compete at all with intel. they seem so far behind now, arnt they still using 32nm architecture?
>>45463753
Yes, but their marketshare is so insignificant, I doubt they'd take AMD's place.
>>45463807
Yes, the FX series still uses 32nm. But Excavator will probably use 28 (which is big compared to Intel's 22nm).
>>45463765
MSI,best stock fps results and best OC potential since it has memory cooling,it has no backplate though.
>>45463840
thats too bad. i hope they get their shit together
>>45462988
There is literally nothing wrong with having a decent 4 core amd chip in your device you fucking autists
>>45463807
Their K12 and Zen lines are 14nm FinFET. The FX series has stagnated because theres no money in it for them at the moment to continue releasing marginally faster desktop chips that no one will buy. They're still selling off Vishera chips that have been sitting around in a warehouse.
>>45463840
The already released Kaveri chips use GloFo's 28nm SHP node, the Carrizo APUs will be AMD's second generation of big core 28nm chips. They've also produced Kabini/Temash and Beema/Mullins chips at 28nm.
Saying that GloFo's 28nm node is far behind intel's 22nm node is just short of a bold faced lie. In terms of gate pitch they're very close, and GloFo's 28nm node produces a 25nm channel. Intel's 22nm Trigate process produces 26-27nm channels. The only key metric that GloFo's process is behind in is cache density, but this is to be expected. Intel has always been ahead of the curve here.
>>45463019
/thread
>>45462988
Tell the media that North Korea has hacked Intel and are able to control every Intel PC remotely.
we can't
>muh power efficiency
>muh mobile chips
fuck this shit
What's wrong with AMD?
>>45464012
hehe. we should really do this, it might work since North Korea is a suspect in the Sony case
>>45464056
At the moment? Nothing. They're doing exactly what they need to be doing.
>>45463931
do you have high expectations for AMDs next products? or do you think they will compete closer with intel than they have this/previous generation? i know that intel is usually ahead but its a bit depressing that amds current stuff is so far behind
I wish they wouldn't focus too heavily on APUs atm but that'd what they're doing. I think they're too afraid to do anything too big as it would also come with a huge risk. Do they're playing it safe for now I suppose. Maybe next year or the year after we'll see some new chip that is actually worthwhile. Maybe they already have one in the works and they're keeping it under wraps.
I want CPU that can emulate CELL.
>>45462988
It's pretty much done...
The got rid of the bad executives, hired back their old talent and have a steady contract base to keep themselves afloat, now the only thing needed is time.
Keller has only been back since late 2013, it takes a few years to get a new arch taped out...
>>45464085
>do you have high expectations for AMDs next products?
I'd really like to believe that they'll deliver a chip thats competitive across the board, but I seriously doubt it. Best case scenario is that they become somewhat competitive in serial performance while still offering top tier IGP performance. That at least will let them compete with intel's low TDP parts, Celerons, Pentiums, i3s, and their locked i5 SKUs. They could still regain some server market share by pricing their chips well below a Xeon. Provided that power consumption is roughly equal the price/performance ratio would be in their favor.
> do you think they will compete closer with intel than they have this/previous generation?
When the Zen chips are released they'll be competing against intel's Skylake architecture. If AMD's new arch was anywhere near it in serial performance and power consumption then it would be a win, even if they were 10% behind. The last of AMD's 45nm chips weren't too far behind intel's 45nm chips. They've been close before, and with dropping the whole Bulldozer derivative architecture theres no reason they can't be close again.
>>45462988
Get multiple cores to run a single thread faster. If they can pull it off, Intlel will be left reeling for years.
>>45464194
There actually is an architecture for this, but I don't know if its ever made it into a real world product so its impossible to tell what performance impact it would actually have.
Has anyone said make more cores, yet?
>>45464233
Try the search function next time, moron.
>>45464218
Even if it was a minimal performance boost, AMD could just do what AMD does and bolt on more cores. That would be the real breakthrough. Wait for Intel to announce a tick or tock, and the day after announce and release a 64-core desktop processor which can run multiple cores per thread.
>>45462988
There's no "problem" with AMD to begin with. Since the C2D was introduced Intel has been ahead at single threaded performance and if you look at benchmarks even the Bulldozer chips were realistically equal to their Intel counterparts regardless of Intel cheating and buying the press focus on single threaded ICC benchmarks.
The only reason to think AMD has an issue is if you think a 32nm chip won't be naturally "slower" than 22nm chip.
>>45464218
I have a very high suspicion that you could do that for the x86 ISA, if you could I'm pretty sure we'd be seeing at least some kind of experimental prototype from either AMD or Intel in that direction.
It's probably only possible for less complicated shit like RISC
>>45464278
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2014/10/24/soft-machines-visc/1
The VISC arch from this company describes a kind of clustered simultaneous multithreading. Its like hyperthreading on steroids where every core is virtual, and can work on the same threads.
Though again, I don't know if this has ever seen the light of day so their claims could be greatly exaggerated. They're not the only company to develop an arch that does this either.
>>45464347
Honestly it seems logical for intel to attempt something like it given how long they've had SMT implemented. If AMD doesn't do something like it intel eventually will.
Run winsxs side by side with aliases. Youse host controller
>>45464363
AMD would have to figure out how to get it to work with x86-64 though. Otherwise, we''d just end up with Itanium again.
They have a whole pile of chip wizards and a femme MIT grad CEO.
I believe in the new AMD.
>>45462988
Release moar coars on APU at 10Ghz and integrated GDDR6 RAM
AMD GPUs can be competitive in the future IF they manage to make proper drivers. If they don't, the GPU division will be fucked, and I bet my ass that that's what's gonna happen.
Their CPU division is pretty much fucked already, so here's what I predict:
When the current generation of consoles will be over, they'll stop producing x86 chips, because they'll be so much ahead of Intel that even with uber-low prices, nobody will buy their shit anymore.
Then, they'll try to survive making cheap ARM processos, but it will be too late for that, and therefore AMD will go bankrupt by... 2022 or something.
>>45464466
Many people run amd cards without having any driver problems at all. I had a 6870 for over 3 years myself with zero driver problems.
I have a gtx 580 now before you accuse me of fanboyism
>>45464502
I've had a 6970 for 3 years too, and it was great; AMD fucked up with the 200 series drivers, and the problem is that they don't give a shit about it.
I have a 290x, by the way.
>>45464056
Only thing wrong with AMD is the CPU department, way behind Intel. APU and GPU divisions are doing ok.
fuck anything x86. Of course they would make major losses in the beginning, but maybe it could work out at some point, especially since a complete overhaul of the architecture becomes more urgent every day.
>>45464421
I was sure we'd have 10Ghx cpus by now.
I mean, you could overclock pentiums 4's to ~4Ghz back in '04...
>>45464532
So what is wrong with the 200- drivers?
I was planning on getting a 2nd hand R9 290
>>45464564
He's a COINTEL shill, the 280x I bought in August has NEVER had an issue or driver hiccup. The only issues he's referring to are the natural immature driver problems that plague AMD and nVidia equally... hence throttled $1000 Titans that perform worse than a $300 AMD.
Faggot.
>>45464597
Intel? don't you mean nvidia?
>>45464608
>COINTEL
>INTEL
It's a form of disinfo shilling.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO
>>45464564
you mean: what doesn't suck?
I've had performance and stuttering issues since day1; issues with many games older than 2-3 years; OpenGL support is basically non existant; the first releases of that god awful driver even had problems with the fan and killed several GPUs (including mine).
I've had so many fucking issues I can't even remember them all.
The sad thing is, this piece of shit of a GPU is as fast as a 970, BUT a 970 runs most games 30% faster, without stuttering, and without being a fucking housefire.
THIS is the worst video card I've ever had, seriously
>>45464623
I've read plenty on 200-series cards, and if the drivers really were that shitty I'm sure I would have read everywhere about it
>>45464623
Not to mention, GNU/Linux support.
>>45464636
They ARE that bad, believe me.
I can make videos if you don't believe me.
>Adreno
>>45463677
How would they face monopoly charges if they're based in Israel :^)?
>>45464658
Why would you go through such lengts to prove it?
I find it supicious that I haven't read about what you say anywhere
>>45464641
whats up with the linux support? i bought a r7 260x recently for my new build. i planned to do most of my gaming on windows but id like to run some stuff on ubuntu
>>45464623
>Be marketing shill
>Pretend to be part of the collective
>Discredit product based on "personal experience" with absolutely false claims that have zero basis
>Reaffirm with strong negative opinion
See there he is again. nVidia's done it twice and this queer claims AMDs are currently doing with zero citations.
Exhibit A) http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/warning-nvidia-196-75-drivers-can-kill-your-graphics-card/7551
Exhibit B) http://modcrash.com/nvidia-display-driver-damaging-gpus/
>>45464673
Let's examine one of the issues I've encountered: OpenGL support. Basically, the only OpenGL game I can play without issues is Minecrap.
Baldur's fucking gate enhanced edition showed a black screen (recently fixed);
On the left, you can see Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic; and if you google a bit, you'll find out about issues with id3 and id4 based games like Quake 4 or Star Trek Elite Force.
Basically 90% of OpenGL games either glitch or don't work at all.
This is shit.
>>45463054
Intel is is a shameless company with no ethics. Looks up the Intel fortran compiler purposefully crippling performance on anything nonintel. They got sued by the FTC. Also they give away free processors to make their image stronger because they're rich jews and they know amd won't get used by manufacture when atoms are being given to them for free.
Apple uses slave labor and shit proprietary sources and hardware.
Amd wants open standards for technology so we can all move forward . And AMD is the bad guy here?
This thread is why tech has gone no where in in the past 5 years. Fucking idiots.
>>45463067
You're joking right?Intel massively overpriced their CPUS until amd could compete forcing them to lower prices. You want an evil monopoly? You're breed is is what allows the rich and evil to maintain power . Blind sheep
>>45464683
I'm not a marketing shill, just an frustrated buyer of a 290x. Their previous cards were a lot better.
Also, those claims were bugs, and AMD drivers had them as well.
>>45463048
>Let nVidia buy it so nVidia can make real CPUs to fight Intel :)
The x86 license of AMD is non-transferrable. If someone buys them up, they won't get the license.
>>45463658
It used to be this way before and started competing. You're just too young and stupid to know it
>>45464564
>2nd hand R9 290
Please don't
>>45464732
tell me more about how x86 licensing works please. genuinely interested
>>45463690
Samsung makes screens and chips for Apple.
>>45464770
Why not. It would be a decent aftermarket version not the shitty reference one
>>45462988
Phase out "enthusiast CPUs" and pour all resources into APU and GPU development
>>45464816
That's exactly what they're doing and it's exactly what's crippling them.
>>45464711
Neither AMD nor NVIDIA have ever bothered with decent OpenGL support on Windows, because nearly all Windows games use DirectX.
>>45464711
>Basically 90% of OpenGL games either glitch or don't work at all.
Good thing then that nearly no commercial game released in the past 10 years used OpenGL (other than Minecraft).
Add more cores
>>45464834
Are you fucking kidding me? I've never had a single problem with nvidia opengl drivers.
Kotor works perfectly on nvidia btw
>>45463418
Really. It took this long?!
>>45464862
NVIDIA's OpenGL performance on Windows is fairly shitty compared to their Linux drivers.
>>45464828
>and it's exactly what's crippling them.
You mean shit like all 3 major consoles of this generation using their chips? going by the previous generations numbers, that will net them over ~300 million in combined sales over the next 3-4 years.
>>45464876
bad performance, not working is another.
nvidia opengl drivers may be slow (but fast enough for old games), but amd drivers don't fucking work at all.
>>45464727
>amd drivers had them as well
>post has two citations
>yours has none
>nvidia shill detected
>>45464908
Ooops
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=290x+fan+issues
>>45463677
>Intel has nothing to lose.
this delusion right here
protip dipshit, ARM
the reason why most smartphones, tablets are still use ARM is because ARM is like $10 a SoC. Intel is already having issues competing.
over pricing their shit because some shitty competitor left the scene would be the dumbest thing they can do and would just be asking for more ARM laptops and desktops.
>>45464851
how is that a good thing that games use a shitty proprietary API?
>>45462988
release a 5ghz/1ghz APU and replace all mid range set ups
>>45462988
reverse hyperthreading
>>45465245
Seems like a moot point with Intel putting in more cores, and I don't think reverse hyperthreading would even work.
>>45465292
I don't know how they could make it work on a hardware level, but it would fix any complaints about per core performance
are there any rumors about carrizo release date, or is all we know "first half of 2015"?
They need to make the first street-legal 10GHz GPU.
>>45465245
This entire image is fucking painful to read.
>>45465292
>>45465311
Despite how retarded that picture is, what the one moron is trying to describe is actually a real thing. Its cluster simultaneous multithreading. There are a lot of white papers out there for it, for a number of different applications as a matter of fact.
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/articleDetails.jsp?arnumber=4601890
Also:>>45464363
At least the AMD FOSS drivers actually work for the most part. That's a lot more than you can say for nouveau.
>>45465564
Does radeon still has proprietary blobs?
>>45465557
Is it like real real? Or the same as that infinite detail shit
>>45465577
It does, nvidia was planning on doing the same thing though so nouveau might need it as well.
Add more cores, increase clock rate, rise TDP, burn the heretics
I'm waiting for a mini-ITX ARMv8 server board so I can make a fanless NAS.
>>45465594
Its real real. Though like SMT the performance benefit would depend on the type of workload and how predictable it was. For something like a synthetic benchmark that consistently loads a core with a heavy integer instructions then the potential performance gains are quite large. In a real world client workload however its far less certain.
focus on security and expose intel's backdoors and scare and spread intel fud
also open source their architecture so everyone knows whats inside
>>45465731
Even if AMD wants to, amd64 shares some x86 specifications and that belongs to Intel.
>>45465689
>ARM powered NAS filled with a dozen super reliable SSDs
>everything is passive
>totally silent
Thats something I could get behind. Now we just need consumer grade fiber optics to become cheap and common place because cat6e is so pedestrian.
>>45462988
Sue Intel for all the stupid shit they do against AMD. Again.
I'm not into /pol/ mentality but I do think Intel is "jewing" really hard since forever.
AMD got massively fucked, they can't recover and what Intel has been made to pay isn't enough imo.
Plus we know Intel is just keeping AMD close enough to not be sued for monopoly, someone who's not an Intel shill should step up and fucking put some real control on them, it's getting out of hand.
We're gonna end with Intel being so rich they will be able to afford the fines from monopolists practices kinda like Microsoft did back in the day in europe.
>>45465912
I think they have a few years before they can do that again
>>45464145
You need programmers/developers for that.
>>45463455
>16 core consumer CPU with ECC please.
why for both
why 16 cores on consumer CPU?
why ECC on consumer CPU?
>>45463067
actually believes this
>>45463067
>doesn't know basic economics
>thinks a monopoly position is good for the consumer
>>45466592
Because cheap virtualization farm.
Join the OpenPower group.
Start producing and selling Power chips with x86 virtualization because of all the extra powers.
Profit.
>>45466758
I'll get right on that after I magically acquire several billion dollars to start up my fabless semiconductor firm.
